Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Ar In 260


ktyler

Recommended Posts

While attending the outstanding MGN and very evil man (Shawn Carlock) planted a sead in my mind to explore the DPMS 260 for tactical division 3 gun. I have never shot one and have no idea how they perform for 3 gun. I know they are very accurate for the long range stuff and are showing up in sniper matches all over.

Is shooting major (6.5 grendel, 308, 260) rifle in USPSA 3 gun going to make that big of differnece with the added recoil. It would be nice to speed up on those tight shots and only lose 1 point for the B or C.

Also what about the Grendal 6.5? I have not heard much but those who have them love them.

I know ammo will cost about 2/3 more than 223 but I shoot so little rifle I really don't consider it an issue.

I am just wondering about this. Any info would be great.

Ktyler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keith,

I've been looking at the same thing and will watch this thread for answers too. That said, the generally held belief is that shooting Major isn't worth in regular 3-gun Divisions. Recoil, costs, limited magazine capacity are the three big reasons and the fact that you can shoot a 223 SO MUCH faster than a major caliber.

One place that shooting major IS an advantage (in fact, a requirement) is He Man / Heavy Metal but many of those matches require a 308 as a minimum caliber leaving the 6.5 and 260 out of the picture. I think that's a damn shame, because I, like you, think either of those two calibers brings a lot good things to the party.

One of these days I'm going to buy a stripped Armalite upper and have JP install one of their excellent "Supermatch" barrels in 260 with an adjustable gas system. Even if I can't find a "gun game" to go play with it in it should be a superb long range rifle

.

FWIW, I heard Matt Burkett say that it's easier to form comparatively cheap 260 brass by necking UP 243 brass rather that necking DOWN 308.

Ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you guys are looking a odd ball calibers (ie not 223 or 308), and want something to shoot really flat and accurate with a little more muscle than the 223, have you considered the 243 Akely improved also known as the 243 IMP? I have one in a 700 bolt gun, and it is pretty darn amazing, I can shoot standard 243 remington in the chamber to fire form the brass (no neck issues with going up, and thinning out the neck) and even the cheapy 243 rem shoots good. The 243 akley shoots better, holds more powder, and goes faster.

I have not heard of anyone using 243 Akley in a gas gun, but would not see any issues using it in an AR10 platform...

just a thought

PS, I would just shoot Heman with a AR10, much easier on the pocket book, and 308 is definitely field tested as an accurate long range round... I have two AR10's and both are hammers ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it costs more than 2/3.

From Midway:

Winchester white box (20 rds) :

.223 = $6

.308 = $13

Cheapest (for 20):

.260 = $21.50 (Remington Express Ammunition 260 Remington 140 Grain Pointed Soft Point Core-Lokt)

6.5 Grendel = $21.50

Excluding the costs you are also looking at the lack of Beta-Mags, 40's or 45's for the .308/.260/6.5 Grendel. I'm not sure 30's are even (widely) available for the DPMS. Their website only lists 10 and 19 rounders. For the Grendel 26 rounders are supposed to be comming out.

If you have the spare change go for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KTyler,

Shooting a 260 and scoring major would make a difference in certain matches. I think the 260 would be a loser in a run-n-gun type match with wide open targets. The 223's are just too fast and flat, but a match like we just had at MGN with a lot of tight shots and shooting positions might work out.

You'll definitely be at a disadvantage with the 20 round magazines. I know Benny Hill has welded two 20's together and has a 35 round 308 mag, I don't see why it wouldn't work in 260. You'd have to have at least one of those or else you'll take a beating on every 22 to 29 round course by having to reload when the others won't.

A good barrel contour and overall setup will also be critical. The 308 platform lowers are noticeably bigger and the overall weight will add up quickly. A good comp and load should make the 260 very shootable.

Let us know how it works! :D

Erik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I've actually done the .260 experiment. In 2002/3, I shot a FAL chambered in .260 and I shot a 2 load combo: 140 grain Rem soft points at the close targets and 120 Sierra Match Kings at the far targets. My advice: DON'T DO IT.

I had DSA sponsoring me and I thought the cost was to prohibitive! .260 cases ain't cheap and the FAL just brutalized them. The .260 FAL is harder on cases than a .308 FAL. I suspect an AR10 is more gentle but in practical rifle competition you don't want to be shooting a rifle where you feel that the cases are made out of gold, we lose too many. Match grade bullets for a .260 are much more expensive than those for a .223. Plus your barrel life will be nothing like that of a .223.

Plus if you lose your ammo or run out at a major match, you're screwed. Try find a bunch of .260s on short notice.

As for performance, I was able to shoot my way to 2d in Limited at the 3 Gun Nationals with it and I think I even won a rifle stage but it did not really gain anything. The way matches are set up now, a major rifle is a disadvantage. If we shot a lot of paper at long distances, then a major rifle might become advantageous but I don't see that happening. Steel targets are to easy and becoming better and better. We did shoot paper at the 2006 Nordic rifle and it was a fricking nightmare to score.

As for a .243 in a practical rifle: don't even think about it. You have to crank a 107 Sierra at a max load to make major. A 115 is a doable but you're stuck with one bullet. Barrel life? I'd need a new barrel every 3-4 months. No thanks.

Since, you mentioned that you shoot so little, I feel that a .260 is even more of a disadvantage. Spend you time practicing with the .223 buying Federal .223 rather than time at the loading bench or scurrying through for the brush looking for .260 cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen to Kelly. A .30 caliber running major PF is only competitive in the HM Division/Category. For Tactical/Open/Limited competition in the USA, absolutely NOTHING beats a .223 running minor PERIOD*

*Caveat #112A: Unless you are one of a very small group of world class shooters that is and we all know who they are ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Tactical/Open/Limited competition in the USA, absolutely NOTHING beats a .223 running minor PERIOD*

But why go bigger - why not go smaller? How about a .20Practical? The Berger .20 50 grainers have a BC of about .3 and can easily be loaded into minor. Low recoil because of light bullets and efficient comps and flatter shooting than .223. The cases are made by a single rezising of .223 cases.

Has anybody tried this? More info on the caliber on www.6mmbr.com

Any ideas (except for cost) on why this wouldn't work?

t tommi

Finland

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the United States it would have everything to do with power to activate steel at distance. The .223 is at the low end of the spectrum in this regard already. Less bullet mass is gonna' do an even worse job here. We just don't use enough paper at long distance to make this an attractive proposition over here. I really don't see a smaller caliber working steel equally to, let alone better than a .223 with a 160+ PF 55 grain, or heavier projectile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Drift alert]

Are the common rules and cof's making it so we are using ballistics that aren't as practical as they ought to be?

I know we all want the AR and easy 223's, but what about accuracy, POWER, and speed? (And, what about stopping power in a "rifle" at distance?)

Sure 223 is effective and proven...much the same way that 9mm is...but, we are still talking Minor Power Factor here. Are our games failing to recognize POWER properly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several different rounds are being wildcat'ed based on 30 Remington brass. The 6.8 is based on this. That way you can buy bolts and PMI mags without too much trouble. One fella did a 6mm. They are also fiddling with moving the gas port further down the barrel and heavy carriers to delay the unlocking. Krieger sells different length gas tubes.

Some people are real picky, buy blank then locate gas port so it falls in a groove, then drill and finish lap the barrel, then chamber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the common rules and cof's making it so we are using ballistics that aren't as practical as they ought to be?

That has been the rap against the "Mousegun" (.223) from the start. It is a rather inneffectual cartridge as far as actual stopping power goes when compared to a .308 in a standard loading. We are not talking 15-20%% less power downrange, more like less than half the downrange energy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Drift alert]

Are our games failing to recognize POWER properly?

Probably. But it's really not that big a deal. If one wants to shoot a bruiser rifle, we have Heavy Metal/He Man.

I don't want to see 3 gun spin off into an equipment race more than it already is. The game is now geared around the AR15 in .223. I say leave it that way. It should be accessible to a shooter who just goes out and buys an AR and puts a scope on it. What I don't want to see is the rules start to favor some weird oddball setup that costs $3000 with ammo costing even more so that only 50 people on the planet can fairly compete.

That being said, our sport is also about development and cartridge design is part of that. It would be interesting to see what would happen if major power factor was reduced so that the 6.8 made major. Or if we came up with steel targets that easily and consistently recognized power, easier said than done.

I think my foray with the .260 proved a few things. A major rifle could be competitive against the ARs. But it was not an advantage. And it costs a lot of time and money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...